Tags
Clashes, Conflict, EU, Europe, Globalization, Human rights, Media, Meeting, Politics, Russia, USA, War
As Europe is concerned about the effectiveness of Russian media, the EU leaders have asked foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini to draw up a plan on how to support media freedom and European values in Russia.
“The European
Council stresses the need to challenge Russia’s ongoing
disinformation campaigns and invites the High Representative to
prepare by the June European Council an action plan on strategic
communication in support of media freedom and EU values,”
the document said.
Lithuania is one of the champions of saving European souls from
the increasingly popular Moscow viewpoint on the situation in the
world. But it seems like nobody in Europe is ready to pay for
countering Russian media. At least, Lithuanian Foreign Minister
Linas Linkevicius has already declared that the United States and
Europe must coordinate their actions in order to fight Russian
propaganda efforts and provide alternative sources of information
for Russian-speakers. Interestingly, but “providing
alternative sources of information for Russians in the
Baltics,” is what Moscow has been persuading them to do for
the last 20 years. Now, that Russia has successfully done it at
its own expense – time has come for Western bureaucrats to make
some money by becoming part of the process…
What they are trying to prove to taxpayers is that if they do not
coordinate the actions by strengthening alternatives to the
Russian media, they will not win the fight. What kind of fight
are we talking about? Probably, the fight for government funding?
The US Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) has announced its
2016 budget request. The agency, responsible for American
overseas news and information programs (including on Voice of
America and Radio Free Europe), “is seeking $751.5 million to
increase global engagement, move more aggressively into
television and digital media, and support high priority audiences”.
A statement by the BBG Chairman reads: “Our goal is to help
US international media nimbly respond at a time of pressing
national security challenges as well as dramatic shifts in the
way people around the world engage with media… As authoritarian
governments tighten their grip on media and extremist groups
exploit it to sow hatred and fear, our role is to engage
audiences and bring a trusted voice to those who need it
most.”
Did it ever occur to BBG and their sponsors in Washington DC,
that the only reason an increasing number of people in Europe and
the US are tuning in to sources like RT and Sputnik is because
they want to see the other side of the story, to hear other
people, than the usual network flock of ‘experts’, continuously
proposing their audience a choice of 50 shades of gray?
The reason for the increasing success of RT – is that we are not
fighting a war, not even competing with media monsters like CNN,
BBC, BBG, but simply satisfying the need of their own audiences
for an alternative view of world events. As simple as that. Both
in Europe and in the USA there are people who rightly feel that
their voice is not heard. We listen to them; we discuss their
views and let them share it with others. And this straightforward
approach is the competitive advantage of Russian media over the
Western mainstream.
If you compare it to Soviet-era propaganda, the difference is
that modern Russian channels resonate with people’s feelings and
emotions, which makes Moscow’s messages today more successful. I
doubt that can be countered by mere funding. With declining value
of the ruble, RT’s 2015 budget is rapidly shrinking towards a
$200mn mark, compared to BBG’s $700mn plus, the BBC World
Service’s £245 million ($362 million) and Al Jazerra’s reported
$1.2 billion. So, if it’s really going to be a war, which I hope
we still can avoid, it will not be a war of money. Not even a war
of words, but a war of ideas. This is a battle the United States
won in 1776, Israel back in 1948, and which Russia is winning
today.
For this sole reason President Obama has named Russia one of the main threats to US
domination, along with ISIS and Ebola. And this is probably what
made BBG’s Andrew Lack compare RT to a terrorist organization: he
hopes that will win him the money. Such shameful statements from
a person in his position may still make his sponsors disregard
the fact that Mr. Lack is planning to spend $12.5 million
proposed in FY 2016 to support open and free Internet. Last time
I came across free Internet was in Starbucks, but I’m not sure
Mr. Lack is going to share any of his $12.5 million with the
Seattleites. Likewise, I doubt that American money will open the
Web for the Chinese population… Lack of common sense is the only
condition under which Mr. Lack may get to spend a dozen million
on his internet anti-censorship programs.
But not if his enemy is a Russian terrorist organization, like
RT! It may sound absolutely absurd but it is quite understandable
if you look at the other instances where people and organizations
that are committed to investigative journalism have been treated.
For example WikiLeaks, a publishing organization, has been called
a terrorist organization by US officials, and let’s not forget
that many US journalists have been under threat of being taken to
court with references to similar legal mechanisms. So we are
seeing a danger in the Western world, where those in power are
ready to use terrorism laws to silence journalists and media
organizations
According to Dr. Oleg Matveyev, former analyst with Vladimir
Putin’s presidential administration, to stage reforms in US
government media, is mere boondoggle because lately their level
has seriously degraded. These information resources worked pretty
well earlier, in Soviet times, when they were presenting more
alternative points of view. Today they are nothing more than a
red rag to a bull, and not even that, since the Kremlin no longer
considers them to be “enemy voices”. Despite active
jamming, an estimated 42 million Soviet people regularly listened
to the “Voice of America” and the BBC because of the
small credibility of Soviet propaganda. Today their audience
narrowed greatly due to the variety of opinionated Russian press.
American radio stations may be more popular in some post-Soviet
countries, where the problem with freedom of press is more acute
than in Russia. There they can pose a serious alternative to
local sources of information. And I should admit that Michael
McFaul’s Twitter was one of the most popular internet resources
in the Russian segment of the worldwide web when he was posted as
the US ambassador to Moscow. Please note, His Excellency didn’t
charge extra for this activity! He just had a message for the
Russians, which Obama has not…But the diplomat also had a message
for the White House about how the American media dealing with
Russia should be reformed. But this Obama totally ignored,
preferring to focus on a much easier task of staging a revolution
in Kiev, which now became a never-ending headache for himself,
and his opposite numbers in Europe, let alone the Ukrainians
themselves, who are killing each other by the thousands ever
since the cash flow from the United States started.
A Gallup poll last month said Americans don’t look for an
alternative to the US mass media preferred slants on Russia. This
result is greatly influenced by many Americans relying too much
on US mass media, while not actively pursuing other news sources.
People with a secondary interest on a given subject are more
likely to rely on mass media, as opposed to doing further
research. A number of key American TV providers in major US
markets don’t carry RT, unlike other foreign news networks,
including Al Jazeera, Arise, NHK, CCTV and the BBC.
How come this fact is used for justification of additional
multi-million dollar spending on another media standoff?
Nietzsche said it first: “There are no facts, only
interpretations.”
Barack Obama recently called David Cameron “one of my closest
and most trusted partners in the world”. Jeremy Clarkson, a
top rated British TV presenter, called “America: 250 million
w****rs living in a country with no word for w***ker”.
Clarkson was dumped by the Beeb, despite a million signatures in
his defense. How’s that for an interpretation of the life of the
rich and famous?
Al Gurnov, political
analyst, RT
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.